Everything about this offense

[Bull94]

 

 

 

 

This offense will never work here.

probably what many said in harbaughs first year at stanford when they were the 107th ranked offense.

Stanford can recruit at a different level than USF and get the players it needs to make that offense work.

Time will tell if CWT can recruit those types of athletes.

I have my doubts.

 

again stanford plays against a diffferent level of recruit too. Why don't people understand this?

 

we won't be playing USC, Oregon, Ucla, etc every week.

 

Harbaugh's system worked at the university of san diego. do you think they got stanford level recruits?

 

 

Who was San Diego playing? I think it's all dependent. Stanford has the ability to recruit and get who they want/need in order to run that offense and be successful.

 

Taggart's offense (I guess?) was considered to work when he was at WKU?? Highest ranking they ever had in total offense was like 80th (or very close to that). But they were playing such bad teams/programs that as long as you're able to put some better talent on the field, and Taggart has shown he is a very good recruiter, that will show and you'll likely win some ball games just simply from having some better talent which happened.

 

In the middle of the road conference like ours you're playing teams that have the same caliber guys that we have, and even if we have a little better talent the difference between talent won't be nearly as big as if he got play makers and is playing North Texas, and Middle Tennessee as he did at WKU. Unless we can recruit better than every team in our conference by a long shot and get the perfect players for this system like Stanford has the ability to get, I'm with El Toro and don't think it'll ever work here. Do I think it can be implemented and the penalties can go away and that we can get a few first downs? Sure. We'll even score some points eventually. But actually working and being a good offense I don't see it ever happening due to what I said above.

 

that's my point. we don't need stanford level recruits to compete in AAC just like san diego didn't need them to compete at their level.

 

BTW stanford doesn't get that much better recruits than USC, UCLA, Oregon, etc and yet the offense works just fine.

 

you fail to understand that there is a huge difference in the level of competition that USF and Stanford play. just as large as the level of recruits that we attract.

[Bull94]

 

 

 

I'm really disappointed in the offense and the coaches. We aren't improving.... At all...

 

This is my biggest issue. I don't expect to win, and I don't expect to put up 40 points either. But to not see any improvement at all, even with something like penalties on the offensive side of the ball is a huge red flag. People continue to point to lack of talent, but it doesn't fall there. Coaches can be creative and make adjustments and that hasn't happened. If my coaches and I can find a way to improve things with 8 and 9 year old's on a football field where half of them are more interested in picking at the grass and waving to the stands than there's no excuse in my book as to why Taggart couldn't make some improvements.*

 

*Obviously I know there is a major difference between the above scenarios... 

 

you and smazza must be hall of fame pee wee league coaches the way you talk about how successful you are running a bunch of kids teams.

 

 

I don't claim to be a great pee wee coach. I don't claim to be a good coach. I said we can find a way to make adjustments with 8 and 9 year old kids, Taggart has failed to do that with Adults... Do you not see the difference?

 

only you and smazza would think coaching at the college level is somehow comparable to coaching little kids.

[George_Bullnard_Shaw]

 

 

 

 

I'm really disappointed in the offense and the coaches. We aren't improving.... At all...

 

This is my biggest issue. I don't expect to win, and I don't expect to put up 40 points either. But to not see any improvement at all, even with something like penalties on the offensive side of the ball is a huge red flag. People continue to point to lack of talent, but it doesn't fall there. Coaches can be creative and make adjustments and that hasn't happened. If my coaches and I can find a way to improve things with 8 and 9 year old's on a football field where half of them are more interested in picking at the grass and waving to the stands than there's no excuse in my book as to why Taggart couldn't make some improvements.*

 

*Obviously I know there is a major difference between the above scenarios... 

 

you and smazza must be hall of fame pee wee league coaches the way you talk about how successful you are running a bunch of kids teams.

 

 

I don't claim to be a great pee wee coach. I don't claim to be a good coach. I said we can find a way to make adjustments with 8 and 9 year old kids, Taggart has failed to do that with Adults... Do you not see the difference?

 

only you and smazza would think coaching at the college level is somehow comparable to coaching little kids.

 

 

Adjusting to the talent you have is relevant in coaching college, little kids, the pros and managing a work force.

[Bull94]

 

 

 

 

 

I'm really disappointed in the offense and the coaches. We aren't improving.... At all...

 

This is my biggest issue. I don't expect to win, and I don't expect to put up 40 points either. But to not see any improvement at all, even with something like penalties on the offensive side of the ball is a huge red flag. People continue to point to lack of talent, but it doesn't fall there. Coaches can be creative and make adjustments and that hasn't happened. If my coaches and I can find a way to improve things with 8 and 9 year old's on a football field where half of them are more interested in picking at the grass and waving to the stands than there's no excuse in my book as to why Taggart couldn't make some improvements.*

 

*Obviously I know there is a major difference between the above scenarios... 

 

you and smazza must be hall of fame pee wee league coaches the way you talk about how successful you are running a bunch of kids teams.

 

 

I don't claim to be a great pee wee coach. I don't claim to be a good coach. I said we can find a way to make adjustments with 8 and 9 year old kids, Taggart has failed to do that with Adults... Do you not see the difference?

 

only you and smazza would think coaching at the college level is somehow comparable to coaching little kids.

 

 

Adjusting to the talent you have is relevant in coaching college, little kids, the pros and managing a work force.

 

and what if the talent isn't any good period? what do you do then? how successful will your pee wee team be if it was loaded with incapable kids?

 

why do people think it was just a simple adjustment that was needed on offense? our defense finished in top 25 so obviously you aren't talking about adjustments on that side, right?

 

our o-line was terrible. it was tiny compared to McNeese state. we had a good RB but too small to take a pounding. our QBs that were here weren't capable of running skip's spread last year.

 

what adjustments can you make when you have an overall lack of talent?

 

does a tech company full of accountants become a fortune 500 after a ceo comes in a makes a few adjustments?

[TrujilloBull2013]

CWT should have used the quick release, athleticism and good decision making of our QBs to unleash our speedy athletes at WR and RB and stayed in the spread (or multiple formation or whatever holtz ran).

 

good idea. then the recruits he brought in last offseason would have wasted an entire season of development in the Stanford offense learning a temporary "whatever Holtz ran" offense that will be phased out by next year instead.

 

i don't understand why so many people have difficulty understanding that holding off on learning the real offense in favor of "tailoring the offense to the talents of the players we already have" only stunts the growth and prolongs the rebuilding process... ESPECIALLY considering the players we already have don't have much ******* talent to tailor an offense around in the first place!

 

get the hard part out of the way now so we can win sooner, instead of suffering thru bad-to-mediocre seasons as the talentless Holtz recruits work their way out of the system and Taggart's recruits work their way in.

 

the players coming back next year will be BETTER OFF having a year of the REAL offense under the belts rather than a year of "tailoring a ****** offense to ****** talent" that may have yielded one or two extra wins and left our players no better prepared for the future than they were a year ago.

 

stop being so myopic.

Edited December 9, 2013 by TrujilloBull2013

[USFbulls24]

 

 

 

 

I'm really disappointed in the offense and the coaches. We aren't improving.... At all...

 

This is my biggest issue. I don't expect to win, and I don't expect to put up 40 points either. But to not see any improvement at all, even with something like penalties on the offensive side of the ball is a huge red flag. People continue to point to lack of talent, but it doesn't fall there. Coaches can be creative and make adjustments and that hasn't happened. If my coaches and I can find a way to improve things with 8 and 9 year old's on a football field where half of them are more interested in picking at the grass and waving to the stands than there's no excuse in my book as to why Taggart couldn't make some improvements.*

 

*Obviously I know there is a major difference between the above scenarios... 

 

you and smazza must be hall of fame pee wee league coaches the way you talk about how successful you are running a bunch of kids teams.

 

 

I don't claim to be a great pee wee coach. I don't claim to be a good coach. I said we can find a way to make adjustments with 8 and 9 year old kids, Taggart has failed to do that with Adults... Do you not see the difference?

 

only you and smazza would think coaching at the college level is somehow comparable to coaching little kids.

 

 

Good grief..... I didn't compare coaching little kids vs at a college level. I know coaching at the college level is a whole nother world. I said no adjustments were made from Taggart on our offense. An adjustment would be doing something different. Not changing the scheme, but maybe cutting down on the shifting to prevent illegal formation penalties that kill drives or maybe run a few plays with 4 or 5 WR on the field and see how that works, or having a game plan against the 2nd worst pass D in the country where we are a pass first offense and pass to set up the run instead of the other way around (agianst Rutgers) or anything along those lines would be an adjustment. 

[USFbulls24]

 

 

 

 

 

This offense will never work here.

probably what many said in harbaughs first year at stanford when they were the 107th ranked offense.

Stanford can recruit at a different level than USF and get the players it needs to make that offense work.

Time will tell if CWT can recruit those types of athletes.

I have my doubts.

 

again stanford plays against a diffferent level of recruit too. Why don't people understand this?

 

we won't be playing USC, Oregon, Ucla, etc every week.

 

Harbaugh's system worked at the university of san diego. do you think they got stanford level recruits?

 

 

Who was San Diego playing? I think it's all dependent. Stanford has the ability to recruit and get who they want/need in order to run that offense and be successful.

 

Taggart's offense (I guess?) was considered to work when he was at WKU?? Highest ranking they ever had in total offense was like 80th (or very close to that). But they were playing such bad teams/programs that as long as you're able to put some better talent on the field, and Taggart has shown he is a very good recruiter, that will show and you'll likely win some ball games just simply from having some better talent which happened.

 

In the middle of the road conference like ours you're playing teams that have the same caliber guys that we have, and even if we have a little better talent the difference between talent won't be nearly as big as if he got play makers and is playing North Texas, and Middle Tennessee as he did at WKU. Unless we can recruit better than every team in our conference by a long shot and get the perfect players for this system like Stanford has the ability to get, I'm with El Toro and don't think it'll ever work here. Do I think it can be implemented and the penalties can go away and that we can get a few first downs? Sure. We'll even score some points eventually. But actually working and being a good offense I don't see it ever happening due to what I said above.

 

that's my point. we don't need stanford level recruits to compete in AAC just like san diego didn't need them to compete at their level.

 

BTW stanford doesn't get that much better recruits than USC, UCLA, Oregon, etc and yet the offense works just fine.

 

you fail to understand that there is a huge difference in the level of competition that USF and Stanford play. just as large as the level of recruits that we attract.

 

 

I don't think we need Stanford level recruits to compete in the AAC, but I do think we need Stanford level recruits to have this scheme of offense be good to great. If we don't it'll be a middle of the road to below average offense that manages the game and doesn't turn the ball over. 

[USFbulls24]

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'm really disappointed in the offense and the coaches. We aren't improving.... At all...

 

This is my biggest issue. I don't expect to win, and I don't expect to put up 40 points either. But to not see any improvement at all, even with something like penalties on the offensive side of the ball is a huge red flag. People continue to point to lack of talent, but it doesn't fall there. Coaches can be creative and make adjustments and that hasn't happened. If my coaches and I can find a way to improve things with 8 and 9 year old's on a football field where half of them are more interested in picking at the grass and waving to the stands than there's no excuse in my book as to why Taggart couldn't make some improvements.*

 

*Obviously I know there is a major difference between the above scenarios... 

 

you and smazza must be hall of fame pee wee league coaches the way you talk about how successful you are running a bunch of kids teams.

 

 

I don't claim to be a great pee wee coach. I don't claim to be a good coach. I said we can find a way to make adjustments with 8 and 9 year old kids, Taggart has failed to do that with Adults... Do you not see the difference?

 

only you and smazza would think coaching at the college level is somehow comparable to coaching little kids.

 

 

Adjusting to the talent you have is relevant in coaching college, little kids, the pros and managing a work force.

 

and what if the talent isn't any good period? what do you do then? how successful will your pee wee team be if it was loaded with incapable kids?

 

why do people think it was just a simple adjustment that was needed on offense? our defense finished in top 25 so obviously you aren't talking about adjustments on that side, right?

 

our o-line was terrible. it was tiny compared to McNeese state. we had a good RB but too small to take a pounding. our QBs that were here weren't capable of running skip's spread last year.

 

what adjustments can you make when you have an overall lack of talent?

 

does a tech company full of accountants become a fortune 500 after a ceo comes in a makes a few adjustments?

 

 

Are you clueless? 

 

No one is on here saying an adjustment would have won us 10 games, an adjustment would have possibly created an improvement on offense whether that be reduction in penalties, a few more points scored, and maybe another win or 2. That's all some of us are saying.... is that we would have liked to see any kind of improvement made on offense throughout the year but there was none... Taggart doesn't have much to do with the Defense as far as my understanding, I'd be pretty shocked if he did considering he runs the offense/calls the plays etc.

 

Does a tech company full of accountants become a fortune 500 after a ceo comes in and makes a few adjustments? You're COMPLETELY LOST haha. Making an adjustment or two on the offensive side of college football equals that comparison to you? Funny stuff....

[Bull94]

 

 

 

 

 

 

This offense will never work here.

probably what many said in harbaughs first year at stanford when they were the 107th ranked offense.

Stanford can recruit at a different level than USF and get the players it needs to make that offense work.

Time will tell if CWT can recruit those types of athletes.

I have my doubts.

 

again stanford plays against a diffferent level of recruit too. Why don't people understand this?

 

we won't be playing USC, Oregon, Ucla, etc every week.

 

Harbaugh's system worked at the university of san diego. do you think they got stanford level recruits?

 

 

Who was San Diego playing? I think it's all dependent. Stanford has the ability to recruit and get who they want/need in order to run that offense and be successful.

 

Taggart's offense (I guess?) was considered to work when he was at WKU?? Highest ranking they ever had in total offense was like 80th (or very close to that). But they were playing such bad teams/programs that as long as you're able to put some better talent on the field, and Taggart has shown he is a very good recruiter, that will show and you'll likely win some ball games just simply from having some better talent which happened.

 

In the middle of the road conference like ours you're playing teams that have the same caliber guys that we have, and even if we have a little better talent the difference between talent won't be nearly as big as if he got play makers and is playing North Texas, and Middle Tennessee as he did at WKU. Unless we can recruit better than every team in our conference by a long shot and get the perfect players for this system like Stanford has the ability to get, I'm with El Toro and don't think it'll ever work here. Do I think it can be implemented and the penalties can go away and that we can get a few first downs? Sure. We'll even score some points eventually. But actually working and being a good offense I don't see it ever happening due to what I said above.

 

that's my point. we don't need stanford level recruits to compete in AAC just like san diego didn't need them to compete at their level.

 

BTW stanford doesn't get that much better recruits than USC, UCLA, Oregon, etc and yet the offense works just fine.

 

you fail to understand that there is a huge difference in the level of competition that USF and Stanford play. just as large as the level of recruits that we attract.

 

 

I don't think we need Stanford level recruits to compete in the AAC, but I do think we need Stanford level recruits to have this scheme of offense be good to great. If we don't it'll be a middle of the road to below average offense that manages the game and doesn't turn the ball over. 

 

just as you would need Oregon level recruits to be great running their offense. or Auburn level recruits to be great at running theirs.

 

your level of competence has nothing to do with what scheme you're running.

 

oh and this offense is geared toward having a great defense. personally i think that has always been our strength.

[Bull94]

 

CWT should have used the quick release, athleticism and good decision making of our QBs to unleash our speedy athletes at WR and RB and stayed in the spread (or multiple formation or whatever holtz ran).

 

good idea. then the recruits he brought in last offseason would have wasted an entire season of development in the Stanford offense learning a temporary "whatever Holtz ran" offense that will be phased out by next year instead.

 

i don't understand why so many people have difficulty understanding that holding off on learning the real offense in favor of "tailoring the offense to the talents of the players we already have" only stunts the growth and prolongs the rebuilding process... ESPECIALLY considering the players we already have don't have much ******* talent to tailor an offense around in the first place!

 

get the hard part out of the way now so we can win sooner, instead of suffering thru bad-to-mediocre seasons as the talentless Holtz recruits work their way out of the system and Taggart's recruits work their way in.

 

the players coming back next year will be BETTER OFF having a year of the REAL offense under the belts rather than a year of "tailoring a ****** offense to ****** talent" that may have yielded one or two extra wins and left our players no better prepared for the future than they were a year ago.

 

stop being so myopic.

 

he was being sarcastic. he is in favor of Taggart running his offense and believes it's lack of talent that truly needs to be addressed.